Hacker News Reader

> You won't know until you've finished spending the money whether it will fail or not.

How do you conclude that? You start off with a bunch of tests and build these things incrementally, why would you spend 20k before realizing there’s a problem?

View on HN

Because literally no real-world non-research project starts with "we have an extremely comprehensive test suite and specification complete down to the most finite detail" and then searches for a way to turn it into code.

Precisely. Figuring out what the specification is supposed to look like is often the hardest part.

100% agreed i use Claude often to just bounce ideas back and forth on specs i would like to create which I know will never gain traction because its either way too ambitious or too niche.

And the amount of times Claude proposes something thats completely contradictory in the same response. Or completely does a 180 after two more responses. Is ridiculous.

I’ve spent nearly 20 years working as a consultant writing software, I know that. How do you think humans solve that problem?

Typically by putting cost caps on deliverables.

Which is pretty much what I said once you factor in that you evaluate (test) the deliverables before paying more.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com